Race, Gender, and the Oppressive Public Gaze…

race-gender-and-the-oppressive-public-gaze

I’ve been struggling with writing this post for some time now. On the one hand there are things I feel need to be said about the treatment of Caster Semenya (especially in light of the news that she has been placed under a suicide watch), on the other hand I don’t want to add to the ridiculous, offensive, dehumanizing treatment that she’s been receiving to date. There is this sick undercurrent to the coverage reminiscent of the treatment of Saartjie Baartman (better known as the Hottentot Venus) particularly with the framing of the discussions of her body. There has been a rush to compare Caster to “real” women with pundits pointing to the size of her breasts, her shoulders, even the shape of her jaw as “proof that she is a he and should be disqualified” because somehow there’s a specific concrete metric for “normal” femininity.

And if you’re deemed to be outside the range of “normal” all the basic rules we were taught as children about polite behavior and common courtesy fly out the window. If the press coverage is any indication many people feel entitled to poke and prod and discuss her body like she’s specifically on display to satisfy their curiosity. After all it’s not like she’s human or anything, what with her having the temerity to (maybe) be born intersexed. Instead she’s a freak with no feelings, no right to privacy, and above all no right to her own body. Right? If you’re staring at your screen right now and contemplating asking if I have lost my everloving mind? I totally understand that reaction. Because it’s how I’ve felt every single time I’ve read an article about Caster’s “condition” or seen someone expounding at length on her body without once pausing to consider that her humanity is being questioned along with her gender. Looking at the descriptions of the treatment of Sara Baartman I’m sure a modern reaction would include an acknowledgment that the way Sara was treated was abominable.

Of course it was abominable and shameful and disgusting. So is what’s happening right now to Caster. And it’s not just about the treatment of Caster Semenya. Yesterday I got into a long protracted discussion about someone wanting trans people to explain the workings of their sexual organs so that they could include a sex scene in a story they were writing. And I explained over and over again that no one should feel entitled to such intimate information, especially to satisfy what amounted to prurient curiosity. And all the basic arguments from the bingo card were laid out (including my favorite “Well how else are people supposed to know if they don’t ask?”) because apparently for a lot of people it has never occurred to them that they don’t have a right to someone else’s body or to their experience. It has literally never occurred to them that people who are not like them have boundaries. Because they’re curious about the “freaks” and their curiosity trumps any delusions of humanity or equality.

Between the misogyny and the racism and the privilege and the sheer entitlement on display this is one of those areas where intersectionality cuts to the bone and then beyond. Being human isn’t about fitting into a box designed by someone else. It’s not something other people get to define for you. And if you think that the way Caster has been treated makes sense because she’s a public figure, or you think you have a right to treat people like an exhibit to satisfy your interest in their experience? You’re directly using your privilege (whatever it may be) to oppress someone. This idea that examining and inspecting and discussing someone else’s body is acceptable behavior because they are “different” is so reprehensible. But, it is also an idea that permeates our culture. That’s the point of tabloids and gossip and fatphobia and every other ‘ism I can think of right now. That’s why a friend just posted about having to tell someone repeatedly that they were not going to be allowed to touch her hair only to be met with questions about why she was refusing. As though she owed this person access to her body.

Curiously enough I think we can all agree that we expect our boundaries to be respected. That we expect people to have some sense of manners and decorum and not stare or point or generally treat us poorly. So then, why are we as a culture so comfortable deciding that the Other (as defined by us) is supposed to accept our intrusion? What is this idea that that they should explain their experience to the world at large? It’s always framed in terms of normal and different, but other than being a member of the majority what gives us the right to define normal? The oppression inherent in turning the public’s gaze to someone and demanding that they explain themselves is often waved away as just a part of life. Because somehow the public’s desire to know has become the public’s right to know. And the idea that knowledge is power has been turned on its head to give the “normal” the power over those that they deem to be Other. It’s unacceptable behavior no matter how you frame it and we should all be ashamed of ourselves.

And now a word from our sponsor…


Your ad could be here, right now.

Race, Gender, and the Oppressive Public Gaze…

Posted in Race, racism and related issues, Syndicated feeds | 5 Comments

New political cartoon: Bitch If You Do, Broke If You Don't

Click on the cartoon to see it bigger.

Posted in Cartooning & comics, Economics and the like, Feminism, sexism, etc, Gender and the Economy | 47 Comments

Congratulations, Teabaggers!

Wow! You drew 2 million people to Washington on Saturday! I mean, someone said ABC News said you did, and clearly that’s totally accurate, just as accurate as the thing I heard where Fox News is reporting that Barack Obama currently has an 193% approval rating. Also, you’ve got really convincing pictures, like this one, that show a totally full mall from a rally that occurred over a decade ago, thus proving that Al Gore once grew his beard out.

I mean, hey, it’s a pretty nice picture. But frankly, it’s a bit of a wide shot. I, for one, would use a more intimate one, one that shows some of the joy of the moment. Here’s one that is at least as accurate as the one you used, and I, for one, like it:

KingPhoto-sm

You’re welcome. Oh, and just to show I’m fair and balanced, here, via ODub, is  an image of one of the actual teabaggers, with a message that sums up the right-wing view of the world as coherently as anything I’ve ever seen:

coherence

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Posted in Conservative zaniness, right-wingers, etc. | 25 Comments

Afghanistan, Another 9-11 and American Elections

At Obsidian Wings, Eric Martin discusses how the recent, blatantly fraudulent Afghanistan election effects the prospects of U.S. success there.

Due to the complexity and tenacity of the multi-layered, multi-faceted conflict that we are seeking to address as an outside presence with limited resources and staying power, we are forced to bank on a miraculous combination of luck, good fortune and skill in order to pull off an outcome that, if all goes well, might come to fruition some 15 years and a couple trillion dollars down the road (with many thousands of NATO soldiers lost in the interim). But all is not going well, far from it. One of the most crucial political watersheds has played out in worst-case scenario terms. COIN will not fix this. It’s well past time we abandoned what George Kennan called the “stubborn pursuit of extravagant and unpromising objectives.”

In addition to the other (in my opinion, extremely unpersuasive) reasons for maintaining a huge U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, Democrats may also be motivated to stay in Afghanistan because they’re afraid of the worst-case scenario for future US elections.

Our strategy in Afghanistan cannot prevent future terrorist attacks against the U.S.; there are many failed states in the world other than Afghanistan, which al Qaeda or other terrorists could use as a base while attacking the U.S.. Our presence in Afghanistan doesn’t prevent future terrorist attacks; it just relocates the people planning the attacks, from Afghanistan to other locations.

From the point of view of the Obama administration, however, that prospect must be a pretty big elephant in the room. Suppose the US greatly reduces its presence in Afghanistan, and then there’s a terrorist attack in early 2011, organized by an al Qaeda group which — had we not pulled out of Afghanistan — would have organized the exact same attack from one of the ungoverned areas of Pakistan?

The US wouldn’t be any worse off a result — the US civilians killed in such an attack would be just as dead in either case. But the Democratic Party would be much, much worse off. Any terrorist attack is bad — but a terrorist attack that can be directly blamed on a specific policy decision by a Democratic prescient, would wipe out the Democrats electorally. I honestly can’t imagine a bigger boon to Republicans.

I’m not saying that the Obama people aren’t sincere about their reasons for wanting to maintain our huge military commitment to Afghanistan. But I wonder if the worst-case scenario for the Democratic party isn’t biasing Obama’s people towards thinking the case for war is stronger than it actually is.

Posted in Afghanistan, Elections and politics | 6 Comments

Kanye West, What The Hell Is Wrong With You?

kanye-west-what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-you

For those of you who, like me, don’t watch the MTV Video Music Awards, you may have missed a little tidbit. Last night country singer Taylor Swift won for “Best Female Video” and went up to accept her award. In the middle of her speech Kanye West walked out on the stage, took the mic from her, told her that he was going to “let her finish,” then said something about how Beyonce had made the best video that year. I guess he was upset that Beyonce hadn’t won and wanted to let everyone know this in the middle of the winner’s speech.

That is some goddamn bullshit, Kanye.

Later on that night Beyonce did win the “Best Video” award and said that when she was 17 and up for her first VMA is was one of the most wonderful moments of her life. Then she invited Taylor to come on stage and have her moment. I’m not a big fan of Beyonce but that right there shows a lot of class. Whereas Kanye showed he has NONE.

I mean, WTF Kanye? I am just as eager as you to have my favorite artists or friends win awards. But never would I ever consider interrupting an acceptance speech to give that opinion. Beyonce certainly didn’t seem to appreciate that, and who would? That’s not at all cool.

Kanye is known for being a bad boy and opinionated and I’ve always appreciated him for being outspoken and for saying on TV “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” But that is an entirely different thing from this.

I know Kanye has pulled some award show antics before, but I wonder if he would consider doing that kind of thing to another male artist. Like to run up on Jay-Z, pull the mic, and shout “50 Cent made the best rap video this year and y’all are punks for not recognizing!” Or even pulling the mic from John Mayer to give his love to Maroon 5.

Regardless, that is just some bullshit. In know his mother gave him some better home training than that. The line between bad boy and public asshole has now been crossed. Brother man would do best to step back on the other side.

And now a word from our sponsor…


Your ad could be here, right now.

Kanye West, What The Hell Is Wrong With You?

Posted in Syndicated feeds | 15 Comments

Health Care Reform Won't Include Undocumented Immigrants. But It Should.

Andrew Romano at Newsweek:

From a purely economic standpoint, insuring illegal immigrants makes a lot of sense—and not just for them, but for everyone.

Consider a few statistics. According to a July article in the American Journal of Public Health, immigrants typically arrive in America during their prime working years and tend to be younger and healthier than the rest of the U.S. population. As a result, health-care expenditures for the average immigrant are 55 percent lower than for a native-born American citizen with similar characteristics. With the ratio of seniors to workers projected to increase by 67 percent between 2010 and 2030, it stands to reason that including the relatively healthy, relatively employable and largely uninsured illegal population in some sort of universal health-care system would be a boon rather than a burden. “Insurance in principle has to cover the average medical cost of all the people it’s serving,” explains Leighton Ku, a professor of health policy at George Washington University. “So if you add cheaper people to the pool, like immigrants, you reduce the average cost.” More undocumented workers, in other words, means lower premiums for everyone.

The actuarial advantages don’t end there. As it is now, undocumented workers (and others) who can’t pay their way receive free emergency and charitable care—a service that costs those of us with health insurance an additional $1,000 per year, as Obama noted. But if illegals were covered, this hidden tax would decrease, further lowering our premiums and “relieving some of the financial burden on state and local governments,” says Harold Pollack, a University of Chicago professor who specializes in poverty and public health. What’s more, employers currently have a clear economic incentive to hire undocumented immigrants: they don’t require coverage. A plan that mandates insurance for native workers but not their illegal counterparts actually makes life harder on the blue-collar Americans competing for jobs (and railing against immigrants) because it means that hiring them will cost more than hiring a recent transplant from Mexico City. As The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein recently explained, “If you’re really worried about the native-born workforce, what you want to do is minimize the differences in labor costs between different types of workers. A health care policy that enlarges those differences—that makes documented workers more expensive compared to undocumented workers—is actually worse for the documented workers.”

At this point, you’re probably wondering whether taxpayers would have to foot a bigger bill for these newly insured illegals. Not necessarily—at least in theory. As Obama said in Wednesday’s speech, “Like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects” to fund whatever care it provides. Given that many undocumented workers leave the country before they’re old enough to require much medical care, says Phillip Longman of the New America Foundation, “you could set up the system in a way that that they wind up contributing as much or more than they receive” in low-income subsidies, especially when the “offsetting savings of lower emergency-room use” are factored in.

As Romano notes, coverage of undocumented immigrants is politically impossible, even though it makes sense. (Via Ezra.)

Posted in Health Care and Related Issues, Immigration, Migrant Rights, etc | 16 Comments

Open Thread – Möbius Bach Edition

Please use this thread to post whatever you’d like. Self-linking is awesome.

The Third Carnival of Feminists!

Insurance companies consider domestic violence a pre-existing condition.

A white reporter who was beaten up for no reason tries to understand what happened. Ta-Nehisi has an interesting take.

Rawles argues that Uhura isn’t diminished by romance in the new Trek film: “Uhura is a black girl and there is no angle from which her actually being allowed to have consensual sexuality, being desired, and being loved (in addition to having her job and intellect, no less) is a fundamental downgrade from what she had before.”

Whedonverse fans should be sure to check out the archive of “Feminism and Joss” related posts at This Ain’t Livin’.

Recursiveparadox has an interesting post discussing, among other things, male privilege from the point of view of a trans woman. (Curiously, when this post was crossposted on Deeply Problematic, it was illustrated by one of my cartoons. Was the cartoon added by RP, or by the DP editor?)

The Terrible Bargain We Have Regretfully Struck

“As long as you’re unconscious, he’s fantastic.” On dealing with sexist doctors.

Interview with John Marcotte, Author of the 2010 California Protection of Marriage Act: “…We are trying to ban divorce. People who supported Prop 8 weren’t trying to take rights away from gays, they just wanted to protect traditional marriage. That’s why I’m confident that they will support this initiative, even though this time it will be their rights that are diminished.”

Alabama Supremes uphold criminalization of sex toy sales; store owner will continue to sell them

For Africans and African diasapora, Caster Semenya Case Opening Old Wounds.

Botfly maggot removed from head — the video

Ben Caldwell drawings of Wonder Woman. He draws real good.

Report Shows Rise in Reports of Sexual Misconduct by Federal Prison Workers (Via.)

Egg and sperm donors shouldn’t be allowed to be anonymous, and shouldn’t be seen as parents.

Why is Afghanistan so hard? Stephan Walt discusses why all “advances” we make in Afghanistan work against us.

Mexico will probably be providing health care for undocumented immigrants from Mexico.

(via)

Posted in Link farms | 37 Comments

Caster Semenya: Part 2b of the Women Athletes series

Before we head on the the subject of Trans women athletes, lets go back for an update on Caster Semanya.

At the beginning of this controversy, Tami asked the question What do women look like?

You magazine answered Dressed Up. Madeup. Heels. Wearing stereotypically feminine clothes. Softened. Muscles carefully hidden under stereotypically feminine clothes. And flowing hair. Don’t worry guys! Now she looks just the way society expects! Calm down now! Hair or no hair, however, even if makeup and all the other effort, her strong facial features were not "feminine enough" for some commenters. Many people tried to insult her by saying that she looked like a trans woman. News flash, trans women ARE women, and for the 10000th time, women have a wide variety of features, and there is no right way to look like a woman! I saw way too much of that piece of ignorance, so I’d like to link Transgriots piece I Repeat-Quit Using ‘Tranny’ To Insult Cisgender Women from Tami’s blog post to deal with that nonsense straight up.

Yesterday, unfortunately, Ms. Semanya’s day got worse. Delux brought this pair of stories to my attention:

Report claims 800m world champion Caster Semenya is a hermaphrodite: The results of a controversial gender test on the South African athlete Caster Semenya have been received by international athletics officials but will only be made public after they have been analysed by experts and Semenya has been informed, according to reports.

Semenya has male and female organs: Extensive physical examinations of Semenya, 18, had shown the athlete "is technically a hermaphrodite". According to medical reports she has no ovaries, but rather internal male testes producing "large amounts of testosterone".

Now, the first thing that smack one right between the eyes is the use of the word "hermaphrodite" to describe her. Almost all the articles use it, and I heard a BBC reporter using it today. This word is inaccuarate, outdated and offensive. Its is a definition that sprang from a medicalizing mindset from the 19th century that basically saw intersex people as deformed and in need to fixing so that they could adhere to the "proper" gender binary. And this stuff is not arcane knowledge either. These reporters have access to the same damn google that I used. Hell they could have looked at some of their peer newspapers, who were suing the correct terminology. And ANY amount of googling on the issue would have brought you sooner or later to the Organization Intersex International which has websites in a good number of the World’s most popular languages. But nooooooo. Make it scandalous! Sell papers! Everyone loves a good sensational story! And to hell with making her a freak in the eyes of society! Who cares we got advertising to sell!

And then there was the second thing that shot me straight into RAGE territory.

See the Guardian had quite an interesting sentence here:

The results of a controversial gender test on the South African athlete Caster Semenya have been received by international athletics officials but will only be made public after they have been analysed by experts and Semenya has been informed, according to reports.

but will only be made public after they have been analysed by experts and Semenya has been informed, according to reports.

Hold, WHAT? Who the HELL was that IAAF employee/Medical doctor that carried out the test, whoever it was that leaked this info BEFORE SEMENYA WAS INFORMED ABOUT THE RESULTS?!!?!?!?! What the HELL??? What the … is the excuse this time? I mean, last time it was, "oh I sent he email to the wrong person, silly me". And this time? What the fuck is it this time?AT least the IAAF’s president seems to wanting an investogation into the leaks that lets the entire world weigh in on her medical info before she even gets to be informed about this herself! But damn it, I LOVE the whole, it ain’t my fault tone in this article

But sports lawyers said that it would be difficult for the South African authorities to mount a case against the IAAF. "There is a general duty of care from a governing body or international federation to the athletes they represent. She could argue that they have broken that duty of care," said Mike Morgan, a solicitor in the sports law practice at Hammonds. "But you’re talking about a South African athlete, an organization based in Monaco and leaks that occurred in Berlin and Australia. Once the dust has settled, I think they will realize it would be difficult to bring a case."

Yeah. Yeah. See, somehow I have this nasty feeling. If this athletes were a white European or American? I just have this nasty feeling that these countries would be leaning on the IAAF to be just a bit more successful than that in making sure that heads rolled for the utter disrespect and cruel, inhumane manner in which Ms. Semanya has been treated. For daring to run fast.

An Intersex Perspective on Caster Semenya points out, among other things:

One depressing sideline of this insistence that Caster must have a definitive dyadic sex is the regularity with which the term "pseudohermaphrodite" is raised by detractors. I’ve posted on how this term emerged in Western medical science to try to define away the existence of intersexuality ( see here.) Basically, in trying to erase the challenge intersex people place to the medical ideology of sex dyadism, doctors in the 20th century decided to call all intersex individuals who did not have ovotestes as their gonads "pseudohermaphrodites," no matter what their anatomy or experience. Somebody can be raised female, with average-looking genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics such as breasts, living a typical valorized heterosexual life, femme as can be (housewife, reader of romance novels, cookie-baker), yet all unaware, have internal testes and androgen insensitivity syndrome. If she goes to a doctor for treatment of infertility, suddenly she’ll find herself labeled a "male pseudohermaphrodite." The medical term defines her as "really a man," not even intersex, let alone a woman. Anyone with testes is "really a man" according to this scheme of classification–which reveals the sex politics and semantics in supposedly "objective" science.

Those same politics emerge from the mouths of Caster’s detractors. She is a "pseudohermaphrodite," they claim–not a woman, not even intersex, but a man trying to cheat honest female competitors.

Here’s an irony for you. According to Western medical practice, the majority of infants discovered to be intersex are assigned female. This is done for surgical convenience (it being considered easier to remove an "inappropriate" penis than create an "appropriate" one), and due to a covert assumption about gender psychology, that women can deal better with gender ambiguity than can men. So we’re assigned female, told we are "really women," subjected to mutilating infant surgery, expected to identify as female, not intersex, told to keep our medical history, if we know it, a secret, and sent out to live dyadic female lives. Many of us carefully live by the rules. But it turns out that if we do as we are told, we are still subject to being outed, discredited, mocked, and returned unceremoniously to the status of intersex oddity, as Caster’s life illustrates–accused of breaking the rules.

What Caster’s situation illustrates, from an intersex perspective, is that we exist. Dyadic sex is a myth–sex is a spectrum. Hormones, chromosomes, genitals, gonads–they are all arranged in many complex ways, and imposing a binary onto them is arbitrary. It’s as arbitrary as saying all fruit is either sweet or sour. Sure, ripe cherries are sweet and ripe limes are sour, but most fruit gets its savor from both tastes, and some fruits balance at the tangy sweet-and-sour midpoint. You can measure all the fructose and ascorbic acid you want, scientifically. You can create a rule that divides all fruit into sweet and sour categories using precise measurements of sugars and acids. But that will not eliminate the fact that the experience of tasting fruit is complex, and that this complexity is what makes eating fruit delicious.
MORE

By the way, a commenter last week asked me if gender testing in the Olympics is over. The answer as the below essay makes clear, is, for the most part.

The Rise and Fall of Gender Testing: How the Cold War and Two "Masculine" Soviet Sisters Led to a Propaganda Campaign

Myron Genel, MD, was one expert who became convinced that gender testing was a joke. In 1990 he and others accepted an IAAF invitation to get together for a workshop on "femininity verification." Later Genel wrote in Medscape Women’s Health: "Our group concluded that laboratory-based sex determination should be discontinued…The purported rationale is to detect male imposters who would have an unfair competitive advantage. In point-of-fact, genuine imposters have not been uncovered; however, gender verification procedures have resulted in substantial harm to a number of unassailable women athletes born with relatively rare genetic abnormalities that affect development of the gonads or the expression of secondary sexual characteristics."

In 1992, as a result of this study, the IAAF defied the IOC and stopped gender testing. The Commonwealth Games and various sports federations followed suit, as did the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other medical bodies. But the testing juggernaut rumbled heedlessly on. At the 1996 summer games in Atlanta, there was a cumbersome DNA screening process for 3,387 women athletes, that proved to be vastly expensive for the Games. Eight women were red-flagged, then further scrutinized and discussed — and allowed to compete.

Finally, in 1999, even the IOC’s own Athletic Commission went to the executive board and demanded that testing stop. Testing was suspended on a trial basis for the Sydney and Salt Lake City Games. But the IOC hasn’t abandoned the old ideology. It reserves the right to re-apply the much-discredited test in any individual case that is brought to their attention. Meanwhile, on the U.S. political front, gender realities continue to be ignored by many conservatives — as in Texas, where the 4th Court of Appeals ruled in 1999 that only couples with standard XY and XX chromosomes could be married.

But at the latest Olympics Beijing Officials To Test Female Olympic Hopefuls For Sex Abnormalities And this is after they cause a scandal at the Atlanta Games They disquialfied 8 women, who appealed and were reinstated. Seven of tehm were intersexed. Also, The Confederation of African Football (CAF) Initiating Gender Testing Before 2010 Africa Women’s Cup

The Women’s Sport FoundationGender Testing – Gender Verification at Elite Sports Competitions: The Foundation Position

And dutchmarbel over at Alas a Blog has one more intersex athlete to add to our list: Dutch sprinter Foekje Dillema

Finally, because I keep seeing this. The news stories state that she has three times the normal amount of testosterone in her body. Please note that this does not necessarily mean that she has any advantage over other athletes. Many intersex athletes that have that amount of testosterone also have Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, which makes them unable to use it. She wasn’t winning in world record time. Non-intersexed people have and can beat her. With that in mind, can we PLEASE remember that we are talking about a human being, an 18 year old athletes and not social monster.?

Next wek, we will finally get around to trans women athletes. Laters!

And now a word from our sponsor…


Your ad could be here, right now.

Caster Semenya: Part 2b of the Women Athletes series

Posted in Site and Admin Stuff, Syndicated feeds | 9 Comments

Political Violence is Always Wrong

We don’t know yet what motivated Harlan James “Hale” Drake to kill two people, including an anti-abortion activist, Friday morning. There have been conflicting reports — the police reportedly said Drake was “offended” by anti-abortion activist Jim Pouillon, but the nature of that offense is unclear. RH Reality Check, however, quotes a source as saying “There was no political agenda” to the killings, and that Drake was “a disturbed man.” Police have said that Pouillon, Drake, and Mike Fuoss, the other victim, all knew each other, but how well or in what context is not clear, other than that Drake’s mother apparently once worked for Fuoss.

So we don’t know exactly what drove Drake to kill, and until we do, I don’t want to speculate as to his motive. He could be a guy driven to kill out of personal animus; he could be a hardcore lefty looking to make a name for himself. And until we know more, leaping to either conclusion is wrong.

What we can do, and must do, however, is condemn unreservedly the killing of Fuoss, and especially, of Jim Pouillon.

I doubt Pouillon and I would have agreed on much of anything. He was the kind of guy who would hold the dead fetus posters outside of a high school — the kind of guy so committed to the anti-choice movement that his actions become almost counterproductive. I dislike both the medium and the messsage he used in life.

But that’s okay; the nice thing about the First Amendment is that Pouillon didn’t need my or anyone else’s approval to share his message. He exercised his right to freedom of expression for decades, and more than once went to court to defend his right to free speech.

Flatly, no matter what one thinks of Pouillon’s message, he should have been free to state that message without dying for it. And I condemn in the strongest possible terms his killing. Pouillon may have been wrong, but he had the right to be wrong, and the right to trumpet his wrongness to the world, without fear of attack or physical reprisal. Political violence, whether it comes from the left or right, is always, always, always wrong. And I will countenance nobody arguing otherwise.

I disagreed with Pouillon’s message, as do many — and indeed, many anti-choicers I know would find his media embarassing. But the way to counter people like Pouillon is to speak out against them, to counter free speech with free speech, to make the case for why you are right and he is wrong. If you believe you are right — as I do on the abortion issue — then you have nothing to fear from letting your opponents speak.

Pouillon was wrong on this issue. But being wrong on an issue should never be a mortal offense.

We will see, in coming days, what motivated Drake. And perhaps we will find that politics played no role in this; I hope so. But whether it did or didn’t in this particular case is immaterial to the larger point. A free society demands that people be free to express their opinions without fear. Whether those opinions are benign or challenging, people must be able to stand up and say “This, I believe,” without fear that they will be killed for it. When we get away from that principle, as we have all too often in our country, everyone of every political stripe suffers for it. I do not have to agree with Jim Pouillon to know that his death will discourage not just anti-abortion activists from speaking their minds, but pro-choice activists as well. In the end, political violence is an attack not on a position, but on the very idea that we can solve our differences through peaceful, legal means, the very idea that underpins democracy itself. And no matter the target, it must always be condemned flatly.

Posted in Abortion & reproductive rights | 5 Comments

In the same vein as Alaya’s Supernatural takedown, Gay Prof dissects “Burn Notice”

Hathor’s Legacy links Gay Prof’s

Burning and Itching

For those who have higher standards than I do, let me give you Burn Notice’s basic premise. Michael Westen, the lead character played by the hunky Jeffrey Donovan (Remember: “b”), once worked as a spy until he was “burned” (essentially framed for a variety of crimes he did not commit – Or did commit, but it was okay because he committed those crimes on behalf of the good ol’ USA (the nation, not the network – I think)). The show’s major narrative focuses on Michael’s efforts to restore his good name and thus return to the spy world. Until he can do that, he takes on odd jobs of fighting crime within a colorful Miami locale.

So, what’s my problem with Burn Notice? The show veers into some problematic realms in terms of race and gender. Mostly it has to do with its valorization of white-straight men as the best and only hope for the future of the nation. Michael Westen’s heroism can only be construed through the vulnerability of his “clients.” Who are those clients? Disproportionately, they are women and racial minorities (and even especially women of color).

Am I arguing that real white-straight-men never fight on behalf of social justice or that we should never see such a representation? No, obviously not. Nor am I suggesting that executives and producers at USA network are participating in an intentional conspiracy to assure the dominance of the white race. I really have no idea if they are members of the Republican party.

We aren’t talking about real life. We are talking about representations. Who ends up as the main “hero” and who best fits the role of “victim” are entirely shaped by gender and race. And for the USA network, white heterosexuality rules. …Minority roles, when cast at all in USA shows, are most often relegated to side characters who need a good, white character to either save or defeat themMORE

Go thou and read the rest.

As an aside, he mentions In Plain Sight. That is my Supernatural. I love Marshall Mann. I would do Mary Shannon’s taxes. And nearly every damned time that show features minorities, (with the exception of Detective Robert Dershowitz) I want to scream. As a quick example, last season the witnesses were a black middle class family whose daughter’s boyfriend was shot as they walked through a ghetto area on their way home from school. And. Damn. There. Were ISSUES. They portrayed the Dad as more invested in his status and his big house rather than the fact that his daughter was in trouble. And at one point, when his behavior was particularly egregious, Marshall challenges him to hit him (Marshall) as a way to puncture his arrogance. Naturally, he backs down. And that was the last frigging straw. See, if that father had been white, that scene would have read “Ha! coward got served!” But he IS NOT white. He’s BLACK. And which middle class black man in his right mind would challenge a white policeman, exactly? Given the history and the not much better present of police brutality and oppression? And this kind of angry-making, hurtful, grating racial cluelessness and carelessness keeps. frigging. HAPPENING. Its to the point where I am actually glad that minorities don’t show up that much in this show (even though it is set in Albuquerque, which is bursting at the seams with minorities. Shhhh! Don’t tell the show runners!)

And now a word from our sponsor…


Your ad could be here, right now.

In the same vein as Alaya’s Supernatural takedown, Gay Prof dissects “Burn Notice”

Posted in Site and Admin Stuff, Syndicated feeds | 2 Comments